Undermining learning: the impact of rewards on learning behavior

2016 Fall.Includes bibliographical references.The undermining effect suggests that external rewards can decrease levels of internal motivation. Research exploring student motivation shows that internally motivated students appear to engage longer and in more challenging tasks compared to students focused on external rewards or performance feedback. The current study tested variables that may decrease susceptibility to motivational undermining for learning behaviors. In all studies, students were assigned to either a reward or non-reward condition and completed a word-learning task followed by a final test. Subjects were given the option to choose to re-study the words at two times during the task—pre- (while reward is still achievable) and post-test (after reward is given and no further extrinsic reward is achievable). Across all studies, an undermining effect was expected: Non-reward subjects would spend a greater amount of time reviewing the words during the post-test interval compared to the reward group. Study 1 directly tested the hypothesis by observing whether or not the reward groups behaved differentially at the pre- and post-test choice. Reward subjects spent significantly less time engaging in the task during the post-test review phase, supporting the presence of the undermining effect (t (1,60)=2.06, p = .02, 1-tailed) but a 2 (group: reward x non-reward) x 2 (study time: pre-test x post-test) repeated measures ANOVA comparing the mean study times for the reward and non-reward subjects’ pre-test study and post-test review time revealed that the interaction between group and study time did not reach significance (F (1,60) = 3.52, p = .065). Study 2 was identical to the first study but with the addition of a surprise, 24-hour delayed memory test to examine whether the extra post-test study had beneficial effects on long-term retrieval. Non-reward subjects were hypothesized to recall more items on a delayed memory test compared to reward subjects due to increased study time. A 2 (group: reward x non-reward) x 2 (study time: pre-test x post-test) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the mean study times for the reward and non-reward subjects’ pre-test study and post-test review times. The interaction between group and time spent on task was significant (F (1,241) = 4.24, p < .05) but there was not a significant main effect for the between subjects variable of reward on the amount of time spent engaging in the task during the pre- and post-test phases (F (1)= .63, p = .44). A 2 (group: reward vs. non-reward group) x 2 (test performance: immediate x delayed) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the average accuracy between groups on the delayed memory test. There was not a main effect of group on performance (F (1, 110) = .82, p = .38) and the interaction between reward group and immediate or delayed test was not significant (F (1,156) = .201, p = .65). Study 3 was similar to the first study but subjects were allowed to choose the material they were learning (i.e., Swahili or Lithuanian words). The element of choice was expected to increase the degree of control and internal motivation students experienced and consequently decrease the effect of undermining between the reward and non-reward group. Specifically, study times between the reward and non-reward group were hypothesized to be equal between groups and higher than then a forced choice condition. A 2 (group: reward x non-reward) x 2 (choice: self-determined x forced-choice) x 2 (study time: pre-test x post-test) x 2 (language: Swahili x Lithuanian) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted. The main effect of choice condition was not significant (F (1,60) = .140, p = .71). The main effect of reward was also not significant (F (1,60) = .920, p = .34) but the interaction between choice and reward on time spent on task was significant (F (1,60) =4.11, p < .05). A 2 (group: reward x non-reward) x 2 (choice: self-determined x forced-choice) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare performance on an immediate memory test for the self-determined and forced choice group but the effect was non-significant (F (1,60) = .67, p = .16); in addition, there was not a significant main effect of reward (p =.32) nor was there an interaction (p = .16)

Humble Coaches and Their Influence on Players and Teams: The Mediating Role of Affect-Based (but Not Cognition-Based) Trust

Humility is a desirable quality for leaders across different domains, but not much is known about humility in sports coaches. This study integrated positive and organizational psychology to define humility as it pertains to sports coaches and examined humble coaches’ influence on player development and team climate. Additionally, trust was examined as a mediator between coaches’ humility and the two outcomes. Participants (N = 184; Mage = 23.44, SDage = 8.69; 73.4% women) rated their coaches’ humility and reflected on the coaches’ influence and their team climate. Results indicated that affect-based, but not cognition-based, trust mediated the relationship between humility and coaches’ influence on players and team climate. Theoretical and practical implications for sports coaches are discussed

Intrinsic motivation to learn: can individual differences decrease susceptibility to undermining effects?

2013 Fall.Includes bibliographical references.This study extended the theory of the undermining effect on motivation to a learning context and examined the interaction with individual goals for learning. The undermining effect suggests that the removal of external rewards can decrease levels of internal motivation. Students possessing a desire to improve, or learning goal individuals, often appear to be more internally motivated to engage in challenging tasks, whereas, performance goal individuals tend to engage in tasks that confirm their intelligence. Students were assigned to either a reward or non-reward condition and completed a word-learning task. They were allowed to engage in studying the words during a free period. An undermining effect was found: A greater amount of time was spent studying by individuals in the non-reward group, no matter the personal goals for learning. Learning goal subjects were hypothesized to show little difference in study time between groups, whereas performance goal subjects were predicted to be more sensitive to motivational undermining and therefore engage in the task more in the non-reward group; however, the interaction between undermining and goal orientation was not significant and these hypotheses were not supported. These results have significant implications for verifying the impact of motivation on learning behaviors and provide support for the encouragement of intrinsic motivation and contribute to the current literature exploring the cause for differences in performance success among students